DDMO A Figment Of Imagination?

by Wild Weasel on Feb 10, 2012 10:50 AM EST

Every time I review a UK game I look for possible DDMO plays and have a very difficult time in differentiating them from other plays. Now it is entirely possible (likely even) that my understanding of the DDMO (I've read and viewed much about the system) is so minimal that I'm unable to identify it, but then I read this from Kevin Stallings:

"They don't run the dribble-drive motion (offense) very much," the Vandy coach said. "That's one of the big fallacies about Kentucky basketball. ... They run set plays about every time down. Every once in a while, they run a little dribble-drive. Two, three times a game."

Stallings concluded his digression by saying, "The dribble-drive is more a figment of people's imagination."

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/02/09/2062632/uk-notes-vandy-looks-to-step-it.html#storylink=cpy

And I thought, maybe I'm not quite so dull. Further rumination led me to consider that the DDMO was adopted by Calipari as not so much an alternative systems but rather as a means of differentiating himself from other coaches, thus providing a great marketing opportunity — especially to the elite player who wants a system that utilizes and accentuates his individual talent. Not much DDMO in 2010 because the presence of Wall, Cousins, et al wasn't conducive. Not much last year either. Hard to note this year as well although the personnel seem nearly perfect for DDMO principles. Have we been hoodwinked by that sly old trickster? Hmmm.

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I dont think so, but again, as with all things Calipari, you might be right.

My thoughts here are that he simply has superior talent here at UK, and the DDMO has become unnecessary as a complete gameplan. The team now uses it as a part of their overall scheme, but there is simply too much talent here not to make use of it.

At Memphis where it was used most fluently, he just had a system that he coupld squeeze the talent into that he had. No offense to those teams, they just were not the quality that we have here.

I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!

by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 10, 2012 2:37 PM EST reply actions

Part of Cal's strategy?

Market the DDMO. Run something else. Throw it up near the rim. Davis for the slam.

Seems like there is still a lot of penetration by Teague, Miller, Jones, or Lamb. Maybe rather than trying to get directly to the rim they are focused on trying to get Davis’ man to help or any kind of rotation that leaves Davis with a mismatch.

by cthom on Feb 10, 2012 4:17 PM EST reply actions

I didn't mean to forget MKG in the statement above.

by cthom on Feb 10, 2012 4:30 PM EST up reply actions

The high pick and roll is about all I see being played on a consistent basis

A man is nothing more than a summation of his scars!

by KansasUKCat on Feb 10, 2012 6:51 PM EST reply actions

Good comment

I think the 2009-10 team ran the DDMO a lot more than last year or this year. One hardly ever notices the DDMO by this year’s team, so I agree that Stallings comment is consistent with what I see. Last year, the handoff was used mostly to take advantage of Knight’s shooting ability. In 2010, Cal began to use the pick and roll and pick and pop to utilize Patterson and the extreme quickness of Wall. This year’s team uses a lot of pick and roll, running Lamb off screens, and passing around to post up Jones. Also, of course the alley oop for Davis. When MKG or Lamb drive the middle, it is a variant of the DDMO, but the dribble drive is not used much.

by jdogblue on Feb 11, 2012 9:19 AM EST reply actions